AA Ponte Preta I think not. This team is owned by the Chedid family who refused to sell my club CA Bragantino when offered a very large sum a couple of years ago and ran GE Novorizontino into the ground a few years earlier than that, and they have only just started recovering. I don't know how the mindset of the Chedid family works, but they were very generous to Bragantino for years and then quite suddenly switched their main interest to Ponte Preta, the two clubs positions being quickly reversed in the Brasilian pecking order, AAPP stepping up and CAB languishing in the Serie B (and Serie C for a short period), only just avoiding relegation again this season.
The attempts of the Russos to get control of the club have now backfired twice. First when they threatened to put the club into administration and had their bluff called by GT and Ashcroft, and then when they relied upon Bas as their Trojan horse as they tried to plot a way back in. Let us hope they will not try again, though really there is now little scope for another effort, so long as the Pozzos remain committed to the club. Of course they would have been in favour of a Pozzo takeover once they realised that Bas was out of control, and unlikely to repay their loans . Again, the hope must be that their quarrel with Bas remains contained, and does not threaten the stability of the club. After a series of owners who were (in turn) gamblers, plotters, business men with no interest in football and then comedian/crook, can we please have a period of stability , if not progress, with the Pozzo family?
Amen! Definitely! It seems like an obvious idea to me..we were talking about it as soon as they took over...a 3 way tournament...great stuff Well said...and yes please
So is a few million such small change to some people that they hand it over without any paperwork. Different world I think. http://www.watfordobserver.co.uk/sp...an__was_for_half_of_Watford_s_parent_company/
I think it is excellent - both parties have proved very bad for Watford and neither can come out of this well
Will any of this have any bearing on the charges aimed at WFC, or are they completely separate? I'm afraid matters like these are way out of my understanding.
Looks like the Russos make a habit of money lending, then go to court when the money is not repaid. http://www.watfordobserver.co.uk/sport/8312114.Russos_sue_Gillingham_chairman/?ref=eb
with you on that one Sandy...it'll need to be explained to me in words of one syllable when it's all over! lol
"Mr Scally, of Long Mill Lane, Sevenoaks, failed to enter into a formal written agreement for the loan and has failed to repay a penny of the money, despite numerous oral and written requests for payment, the writ alleges." So basically you loan someone you hardly know £250,000 without anything in writing stating when or how the money is to be paid back, and then complain when you don't get it back according to the terms.....what terms. If I was lending a mate a tenner, you'd say give it back next week/payday. If I was loaning a quarter of a million pounds I'd be getting him, and everyone else including his mother to sign something.
I should have first copied the following from the wobby: He claims the sum was for half of his shareholding in Watford FC Limited, which is the company Bassini set up to buy the Vicarage Road Championship club in early 2011.
If he sold shares he would have had to issue Share Certificates - so if he did not then his claim is hardly supported.
Talk about double dutch my heard hurts just even trying to read the articlelet alone trying to understand the legal speak I'm going for a lay down in a darkened room
The company that the money that went between Bassini and the Russos is Barrea LLP (sounds too much like barrier for my liking). I thought a company with LLP after it's name was usually a firm of solicitors or lawyers. If they haven't got at least copies of any documentation that exists, they'll be in breach of so many Law Society regulations, they'll be forced to shut down. (I used to work in the internal accounting department of an English solicitors over here) If Bassini is right, does that mean that the Pozzos only bought half of the clubs parent company? If so, can they have Bassini charged with fraud for giving them the impression that it was only his to sell to them? I'm sure if it was for half the capital, the Russos would have created a fuss at the time of the sale. Also a random question, was it the Russos who instructed that employee to not give the safe keys to Bassini?
I'm not overly bothered about the court case, because the football authorities have vicarious responsibility for these people ever being allowed to come anywhere near our club. Of more concern to me are those authorities' takes on our transfer dealings last season. And it's actually a player we brought in that I'm concerned about, rather than anyone we sold.
